Religious Studies 35 (1):57-72 (1999)
AbstractJohn Taylor complains that the "Kalam" cosmological argument gives the appearance of being a swift and simple demonstration of the existence of a Creator of the universe, whereas in fact a convincing argument involving the premiss that the universe began to exist is very difficult to achieve. But Taylor's proffered defeaters of the premisses of the philosophical arguments for the beginning of the universe are themselves typically undercut due to Taylor's inadvertence to alternatives open to the defender of the "Kalam" arguments. With respect to empirical confirmation of the universe's beginning Taylor is forced into an anti-realist position on the Big Bang theory, but without sufficient warrant for singling out the theory as non-realistic. Therefore, despite the virtue of simplicity of form, the "Kalam" cosmological argument has not been defeated by Taylor's all too swift refutation.
Similar books and articles
New remarks on the cosmological argument.Gustavo E. Romero & Daniela Pérez - 2012 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 72 (2):103-113.
J. Howard Sobel on the Kalam Cosmological Argument.William Lane Craig - 2006 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 36 (4):565-84.
The Beginning of Existence.David Simon Oderberg - 2003 - International Philosophical Quarterly 43 (2):145-157.
Time, Successive Addition, and Kalam Cosmological Arguments.Graham Oppy - 2001 - Philosophia Christi 3 (1):181-192.
Must the Beginning of the Universe Have a Personal Cause?: A Critical Examination of the Kalam Cosmological Argument.Wes Morriston - 2000 - Faith and Philosophy 17 (2):149-169.
Kalam: A swift argument from origins to first cause?John Taylor - 1997 - Religious Studies 33 (2):167-179.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
No references found.